Skip to main content

Claimed flights we could NOT retrieve a primary ADS-B trace for

Generated 2026-08-24T16:03:53.116Z by site/docs/Planes/following/apis/public_open_source/code/pull_all.js.

Source tried: adsb.lol globe history — https://adsb.lol/globe_history/YYYY/MM/DD/traces/<hh>/trace_full_<hex>.json

This is the only free, no-account source of historical ADS-B tracks we have found. It serves only what its volunteer feeder network actually received.

WHAT AN EMPTY RESULT DOES AND DOES NOT MEAN. A 404 here means adsb.lol holds no trace for that airframe on that UTC day. It does not establish that the aircraft did not fly, and it does not establish that a transponder was switched off. The ordinary explanations come first: the aircraft was parked and silent, it flew outside volunteer receiver coverage (most of the Atlantic, most of North Africa, much of the rural US at low altitude), or the claimed date is simply wrong. Several of the rows below are already recorded in overlaps.csv as audited inaccurate.

The claim is what is listed. The absence is what we found. Neither is proof.

TailUTC dateHTTPWhy we looked
SU-BTT2022-12-26404overlap OWENS-007 - Bangor ME (audited_accurate, audit: accurate)
SU-BTT2022-12-27404overlap OWENS-007 - Bangor ME (audited_accurate, audit: accurate)
SU-BTT2022-12-28404overlap OWENS-007 - Bangor ME (audited_accurate, audit: accurate)

Where this page fits​

Bangor is a transatlantic fuel stop, and row OWENS-007 is one the audit upheld on aircraft position even though the free archives above returned nothing for SU-BTT — the same pattern as Goose Bay, where the two Egyptian Gulfstreams crossed the Atlantic and the three Falcons never did, and the same status the overlap index records for most of 2022. Route geography is the strongest counterargument in this whole thread and it deserves stating as plainly as the accusation: fuel stops, customs fields and maintenance shops explain a great deal, which is why the case's more durable claims are the ones with paperwork — the DoD purchase order for miniaturized demolition charges, the ATF fragment comparison that came back inconclusive, the court filings tracked under Legal. For the aircraft version of a paperwork claim, Law 2 names SU-BTT, SU-BND, SU-BTU and SU-BGM explicitly and would require the intelligence community to say what, if anything, it holds on them — a far firmer footing than the 73 overlaps tally.